hello people i have a qustion 1st forgive my spelling and sentances run togother and spelling sucks ,but any way how many people edit every pic you shoot then how much for in todays times ther is so much editing software and it is so much easyer than it was back in the day with film ansel adams said to the effect that his pic's were done so well it was 49% the shot and 51% developing so now with that said they had to shoot several pictures just to get the right one which i agree with even now but my father who uses a camera that still uses file (he cant do much any more due to health reasons ) had to shoot several pics. where i can look at mine at the second i take mine then do some editing on the old puter to get a better pic but i still do like he done try to get the best shot the first time and get it right with as little editing as possible any input would be wonderful thanks
Some photos get a lot of editing, others get little. Adams photos were printed and some printing processes have been reported as being complex.
i was reffering to him only in the sence as to what he said . but is it not getting so easy that its now just shoot a pic and don't worry about it we can clean it up at home with a clone tool or make that person in the background go away when we get home on the computer ? just asking i use a photo editor a littel myself i try to keep the editing down to as little as possible i not knocking these editing programs you can do some neat things with them but is it not the atr to be able to get the picture in its most natueal state? not trying to be hypritical just asking and wanting some other people's thoughts on this subject
Joel Grimes is colour blind, but he has an awesome portfolio: http://joelgrimes.com/Artist.asp?ArtistID=12191&Akey=P7FJP8B4 He does a lot of post processing.
Joe McNally does a lot (almost everything) in camera, he shoots Nikon and is an expert at small flash: http://portfolio.joemcnally.com/#p=-1&a=-1&at=0
Apples and oranges but both great.
true they are diffrences and they are both good in their own ways
I think that many people don't get that there is still some "developing" that needs to be done with digital photography. Yes, in the days of film, everything used to be done in camera.. or did it? A lot of things could be done in the darkroom that would complete change the image.. nobody called it cheating or doubted the authenticity of the image.
I do not believe that I have EVER posted a photo that was not first opened in photoshop (or other image software) and at least adjust contrast/sharpness/saturation and the like. I am just developing my photos. But, I have no issue with editing either. I enjoy the process, and am glad that technology has made it easier to express myself in that way as well.
I guess it depends. I shoot raw exclusively and there aren't that many raw images that come out right right out of the camera. If you shoot jpg, most cameras will post process the picture for you and then throw away a lot of the original information, often leaving you with an inferior result. With raw you do the processing, but all the data is there for you to work with.
Obviously, getting everything 'right' (framing, composition, ISO/Aperture/Shutter, exposure, etc.) before you shoot will help ease the postprocessing.
Now as for your question: I sift through the contents of my card and immediately discard the obvious losers. On a good day I edit 85% of the pictures, but I spend much time only on what I consider the winners and real keepers. Perhaps 5%, if I'm lucky.
photo editing, some photographers don't think much of post processing, however not all photos shot do turn out perfect as shot, and if you do not have the chance to go back and re-do the shot you have no choice but to post process. To begin with your shot must be of good quality to begin with and of course in order to get a good quality shot you must try your best to set your camera to the best possible settings for each individual shot, then post processing will only enhance the picture.
thank you all for your awnsers i will keep all of this in mind and i konw i will need to do more now that i have went back to raw format
Using a RAW format (which I use) requires more editing effort but can produce better pictures than Jpeg. I edit all pictures that i use for display online or for prints to get the best results i can. Skies are one area that often need some adjustment to bring out the clouds. While there are a number of editing programs i would recommend Corel Paintshop Pro or Adobe Photoshop Elements for good power at low cost.
A picture must still be composed and exposed well. Try to allow a little extra room in the original photo for cropping and straightening. Even if your camera is level, a picture can look tilted and you will want to correct that.